In January, we had read the various arguments regarding Mozilla's decision
not to get an H.264 license. This has generated a
lot of
discussion
about the future of video on the web. With Youtube, Dailymotion, Hulu and Vimeo having adopted H.264 for HD video, Mozilla and Opera should use the codecs installed on a user's system to determine what the browser can play, rather than force other vendors to adopt Ogg. Refusing to support a superior codec would be a disservice to your users in years to come. Why hold back the majority of your users because 2% of your users are on niche OSes?

H.264 is the specification for a video codec. It's not actual software, it's just specs that others can use to implement a codec. x264 is an implementation of the H.264 spec (or at least of parts of the spec).

Why argumenting about h.264 against theora and not "h.264 against x.264" as codecs instead?

Because X264 *is* an H.264 encoder and decoder? It implements the H.264 standard and, in countries where software patents screw everyone, X264 is not legal just as any other unlicensed H.264 encoder is not.